Coevolving Innovations

… in Business Organizations and Information Technologies

Learning styles and online instruments

Sean Whiteley synthesized the Memletics (Learning) Styles from two brain models: Multiple Intelligences (from Howard Gardner) and the Visual-Auditory-Kinesthetic model (derived from sensory-based modes from NLP).

The Memletics Learning Styles Questionnaire on http://learning-styles-online.com is cited as created in 2004, based on the Memletics Accelerated Learning Manual, by Sean Whiteley (Advanogy, 2003).  With neither memletics.com nor advanogy.com domains currently online, the ebook has been reproduced on scribd.com by Maria McConkey.  Whiteley bases his model on “brain regions”.

… we first look at the basis of learning styles and their influence on learning.  [….] We then look at each of the Memletic Styles in turn.  In summary, these are:

  • Visual. You prefer using pictures, images, and spatial understanding.
  • Aural. You prefer using sound and music.
  • Verbal. You prefer using words, both in speech and writing.
  • Physical. You prefer using your body, hands and sense of touch.
  • Logical. You prefer using logic, reasoning and systems.
  • Social. You prefer to learn in groups or with other people.
  • Solitary. You prefer to work alone and use self-study.

Lastly, we look at how you can improve your learning by using learning styles. One obvious way is to use more of your dominant learning styles. An interesting feature of learning styles is that you can also improve your learning performance by using styles you do not often use. If you are a mainly visual person, then you can make a lesson more memorable by using some aural content in your visualizations. If you like to use logic, then use some physical learning techniques occasionally.

Why Styles? Understand the basis of learning styles

Your learning styles have more influence than you may realize. Your preferred styles guide the way you learn. They also change the way you internally represent experiences, the way you recall information, and even the words you choose. We explore more of these features in this chapter. Research shows us that each learning style uses different parts of the brain. By involving more of the brain during learning, we remember more of what we learn. Researchers using brain-imaging technologies have been able to find out the key areas of the brain responsible for each learning style. Refer to the “Brain Regions” diagram and read the following overview:

  • Visual. The occipital lobes at the back of the brain manage the visual sense.  Both the occipital and parietal lobes manage spatial orientation.
  • Aural. The temporal lobes handle aural content. The right temporal lobe is especially important for music.
  • Verbal. The temporal and frontal lobes, especially two specialized areas called Broca’s and Wernicke’s areas (in the left hemisphere of these two lobes).
  • Physical. The cerebellum and the motor cortex (at the back of the frontal lobe) handle much of our physical movement.
  • Logical. The parietal lobes, especially the left side, drive our logical thinking.
  • Social. The frontal and temporal lobes handle much of our social activities. The limbic system (not shown apart from the hippocampus) also influences both the social and solitary styles. The limbic system has a lot to do with emotions, moods and aggression.
  • Solitary. The frontal and parietal lobes, and the limbic system, are also active with this style.

I’ve based the Memletic Styles on two brain models you may have heard about. The first is “Multiple Intelligences” by Howard Gardner. I’ve broadened his model and made it more applicable to learning. You may know the other model as “VAK,” or the Visual-Auditory-Kinesthetic model. Neuro-Linguistic Programming (NLP) books also describe this model as “modality preferences”.

Source: Sean Whiteley, Memletics Accelerated Learning Manual (2003), pp. 55-56.

As much as I would like to follow up on continuing research, the last mention that I can find about Memletics is a cached version on archive.org from 2008.

My learning styles inventory as assessed from http://learning-styles-online.com sees my highest scores as logical and solitary.  However, a closer interpretation says (i) logical, aural and verbal dominate over visual (slightly) and physical (completely), and (ii) solitary is preferred (but may not dominate) over social.  If I am to have a learning style that includes listening and talking, I would expect that to happen socially!

There’s a glitzier Flash-based Education Nation Learner Profile Assessment hosted by the University of Phoenix using the same seven categories as Memletics.  The 21 questions are phrased differently (shorter than 70 by Memletics), and the research sources is not cited, so the validity of this assessment seems weaker.  The primacy of verbal and aural over logical doesn’t feel right.

In the Perceptual Modality Preference Survey on learningstyles.org, I sense information most as a print learner and a aural (listening) learner.  I’m unlikely to learn by smelling or sniffing.

The C.I.T.E. Learning Styles Instrument from the Center for Innovative Teaching Experiences at the Murdoch Teachers Center in Wichita, Kansas, based on (Babich, Burdine, Albright, and Randol, 1976) had better academic source (pre-Howard Gardner), but is available only administered on paper, and not electronically.  A thesis by L. Harden (University of South Florida, 1992) says “use of the CITE learning style instrument … should be discontinued since no positive correlations were found with this instrument”.

Along the way, I noticed a description of learning strategies (not styles) as serialist or holist, originating from Gordon Pask, described by James Atherton as (2011) at http://www.learningandteaching.info/learning/pask.htm .

The controversy over learning styles as a topic is well described by Guy W. Wallace, “Why Is the Research on Learning Styles Still Being Dismissed by Some Learning Leaders and Practitioners?”,  November 2011, ACM eLearn Magazine at http://elearnmag.acm.org/featured.cfm?aid=2070611.

1 Comment


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

  • RSS qoto.org/@daviding (Mastodon)

    • Dec 19, 2024, 13:00 December 19, 2024
      From the 1982 publication of _Organizations: Rational, Natural, and Open Systems_, W. Richard Scott in 2004 reflected back on the history of organizational sociology.> Before open system ideas, organizational scholars had concentrated on actors (workers, work groups, managers) and processes (motivation, cohesion, control) within organizations. Scant attention was accorded to the environment within which the […]
    • Dec 19, 2024, 12:58 December 19, 2024
      For those interested in detailed distinctions between systems approach, systems thinking, General Systems Theory, system science, etc, Aleksandra A. Nikiforova (Lomonosov Moscow State University) started an entry in the Encyclopedia of Knowledge Organization in 2022 that has been revised to 2024. https://www.isko.org/cyclo/systems .The International Society for Knowledge Organization is a “scholarly society devoted to the […]
    • Dec 15, 2024, 10:28 December 15, 2024
      The Future of Life Institute Safety Index is criticized by Mark Daley as too narrow, with an implicit bias disfavoring open sourcing.> The “Future of Life Institute” released their FLI Safety Index this week. [....] > By celebrating only those models that impose rigid controls on allowable thought and scorning those that grant the user […]
    • Dec 15, 2024, 10:11 December 15, 2024
      In understanding the precursors to the Gunderson and Holling 2001 _Panarchy_ book, it's good to keep in mind that when ecologists refer to "Adaptive Management", the clearer longer label is "Adaptive Environmental Assessment and Management".Holling, C.S. (1979). Adaptive Environmental Assessment and Management -- Current Progress and Prospects for the Approach: Summary Report of the First […]
    • Dec 10, 2024, 13:59 December 10, 2024
      In describing "go energy" and "stop energy", @pahlkadot approaches yang qi and yin qi, in a dyadic processual approach.> This is a useful nuance as I develop a framework for building state capacity. One of my admittedly obvious and oversimplified tenets is that systems have both “go energy” and “stop energy,” much as a car […]
  • RSS on IngBrief

    • Notion of Change in the Yijing | JeeLoo Lin 2017
      The appreciation of change is different in Western philosophy than in classical Chinese philosophy. JeeLoo Lin published a concise contrast on differences. Let me parse the Introduction to the journal article, that is so clearly written. The Chinese theory of time is built into a language that is tenseless. The Yijing (Book of Changes) there […]
    • World Hypotheses (Stephen C. Pepper) as a pluralist philosophy [Rescher, 1994]
      In trying to place the World Hypotheses work of Stephen C. Pepper (with multiple root metaphors), Nicholas Rescher provides a helpful positioning. — begin paste — Philosophical perspectivism maintains that substantive philosophical positions can be maintained only from a “perspective” of some sort. But what sort? Clearly different sorts of perspectives can be conceived of, […]
    • The Nature and Application of the Daodejing | Ames and Hall (2003)
      Ames and Hall (2003) provide some tips for those studyng the DaoDeJing.
    • Diachronic, diachrony
      Finding proper words to express system(s) change(s) can be a challenge. One alternative could be diachrony. The Oxford English dictionary provides two definitions for diachronic, the first one most generally related to time. (The second is linguistic method) diachronic ADJECTIVE Oxford English Dictionary, s.v. “diachronic (adj.), sense 1,” July 2023, https://doi.org/10.1093/OED/3691792233. For completeness, prochronic relates “to […]
    • Introduction, “Systems Thinking: Selected Readings, volume 2”, edited by F. E. Emery (1981)
      The selection of readings in the “Introduction” to Systems Thinking: Selected Readings, volume 2, Penguin (1981), edited by Fred E. Emery, reflects a turn from 1969 when a general systems theory was more fully entertained, towards an urgency towards changes in the world that were present in 1981. Systems thinking was again emphasized in contrast […]
    • Introduction, “Systems Thinking: Selected Readings”, edited by F. E. Emery (1969)
      In reviewing the original introduction for Systems Thinking: Selected Readings in the 1969 Penguin paperback, there’s a few threads that I only recognize, many years later. The tables of contents (disambiguating various editions) were previously listed as 1969, 1981 Emery, System Thinking: Selected Readings. — begin paste — Introduction In the selection of papers for this […]
  • Recent Posts

  • Archives

  • RSS on daviding.com

    • 2024/11 Moments November 2024
      Road trip to Rochester NY and Ithaca, with visits to art galleries as the days get shorter.
    • 2024/10 Moments October 2024
      Journey from Lugano Switzerland, return via Milan Italy, to fall in Toronto
    • 2024/09 Moments September 2024
      September neighbourhood music performances, day out with father, son's birthday party, travel via Milan to Genoa, systems conversation in Lugano
    • 2024/08 Moments August 2024
      Summer finishing with family events, and lots of outdoor music performances, captured with a new mirrorless camera for video from mid-month
    • 2024/07 Moments July 2024
      Summer festivals and music incubator shows in Toronto, all within biking distance.
    • 2024/06 Moments June 2024
      Summer jazz at the Distillery District, in Washington DC while at the annual systems conference, and then Toronto Jazz Festival
  • RSS on Media Queue

    • What to Do When It’s Too Late | David L. Hawk | 2024
      David L. Hawk (American management theorist, architect, and systems scientist) has been hosting a weekly television show broadcast on Bold Brave Tv from the New York area on Wednesdays 6pm ET, remotely from his home in Iowa. Live, callers can join…Read more ›
    • 2021/06/17 Keekok Lee | Philosophy of Chinese Medicine 2
      Following the first day lecture on Philosophy of Chinese Medicine 1 for the Global University for Sustainability, Keekok Lee continued on a second day on some topics: * Anatomy as structure; physiology as function (and process); * Process ontology, and thing ontology; * Qi ju as qi-in-concentrating mode, and qi san as qi-in-dissipsating mode; and […]
    • 2021/06/16 Keekok Lee | Philosophy of Chinese Medicine 1
      The philosophy of science underlying Classical Chinese Medicine, in this lecture by Keekok Lee, provides insights into ways in which systems change may be approached, in a process ontology in contrast to the thing ontology underlying Western BioMedicine. Read more ›
    • 2021/02/02 To Understand This Era, You Need to Think in Systems | Zeynep Tufekci with Ezra Klein | New York Times
      In conversation, @zeynep with @ezraklein reveal authentic #SystemsThinking in (i) appreciating that “science” is constructed by human collectives, (ii) the west orients towards individual outcomes rather than population levels; and (iii) there’s an over-emphasis on problems of the moment, and…Read more ›
    • 2019/04/09 Art as a discipline of inquiry | Tim Ingold (web video)
      In the question-answer period after the lecture, #TimIngold proposes art as a discipline of inquiry, rather than ethnography. This refers to his thinking On Human Correspondence. — begin paste — [75m26s question] I am curious to know what art, or…Read more ›
    • 2019/10/16 | “Bubbles, Golden Ages, and Tech Revolutions” | Carlota Perez
      How might our society show value for the long term, over the short term? Could we think about taxation over time, asks @carlotaprzperez in an interview: 92% for 1 day; 80% within 1 month; 50%-60% tax for 1 year; zero tax for 10 years.Read more ›
  • Meta

  • Creative Commons License
    This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License
    Theme modified from DevDmBootstrap4 by Danny Machal